The University of Michigan is accused of kicking an InterVarsity Christian Fellowship chapter off campus because the group requires its leaders to be Christians – an apparent violation of the university’s non-discrimination policy.

Greg Jao, InterVarsity’s national field director, told Fox News the Asian chapter of the groupwas directed to either revise its constitution – or else be forced off campus. ….

Last December, members of the group were summoned before university officials who told them there was an issue with the section of the club constitution related to leadership.

In order for students to be InterVarsity leaders they must sign a statement of faith. But the university said that requirement violated their non-discrimination policy.

This sort of garbage is happening all over the country. It’s insidious and it violates the right to freely associate with whom you please. It also violates common sense beyond it’s reasonable boundaries.

It’s weird that people with certain considerations insist they they’re leaders have the same. The Pope is Catholic, the president of the US is suppose to be an American, and Governors of the various states are suppose to live in the states they represent. Yes, hateful, all of it! Such discriminatory practices!

Why don’t they just call it for what it is. It’s an attack on Christians freely associating with fellow Christians.

Look, it’s farcical to pretend words of a chapter’s constitution supersede the actions of the various chapters. I don’t know how other chapter’s constitutions read, and it doesn’t matter. Can a born-again Christian ever be a leader of an atheist chapter? Nope, it won’t happen. We can make thousands of other comparisons, as well. So, a Christian chapter is punished for honesty. Well, as long as Michigan has it’s priorities in it’s proper place……. hateful, spiteful, imbeciles.

It takes 2 to tango. Why exactly do the leaders have to sign a piece of paper saying they believe in the Father and The Son and the Holy Spirit? Do Christians believe that no man would ever tell a lie? Because if they don’t then the piece of paper has very little value anyway as far as knowing what a persons belief is. I would bet any amount of money The Pope did not have to sign something saying he is a Catholic. So simple solution the Christian groups can just eliminate that small point that is all. It is not a big deal.

I’m not sure that there’s is a piece of paper to sign. The Pope didn’t have to sign a paper, but it is requisite that he be Catholic. And that’s all that the Christian groups are requiring …… that their leader be a Christian. Apparently, the various universities believe this to be unreasonable.

You example about handicap parking spaces is astute, you could go to the doctor and lie about your crook leg and get a disabled sticker to put in your car. You know I am an athiest and although I might turn up to a church or temple every now and again it does not mean I will try to infiltrate, I couldn’t see the purpose.

“And heck – Bus lanes! What gives public transportation the right to drive where I can’t? Discrimination!” And so you should be I drive a taxi and appreciate the discrimination against you.

Kelly, part of your problem is your own experience. You, as an ethical person would never consider doing something like infiltrating a Christian organization to disrupt it, so you cannot comprehend anyone wanting to. But indeed those type of people are all too common.

Just remember, just because you would never do it does not mean it would never be done.

It is a very big deal. It is not a compulsory group. You choose to join to find like minded people – just like political parties. So they have rules of membership. Now you can argue that Jesus would not be eligible, but that is a non sequitur. If they so chose not to associate with Jesus, that should be there prerogative.

The university is a non compulsory group also and university property is not public space even if it might be publically owned (I can’t just turn up there and do what I want). So from a Libertarian point of view this is one with conflicts. Nobody is being denied their free right of association in a public space or in their own private venue.

“In order for students to be InterVarsity leaders they must sign a statement of faith.”

Suyts that is from your post. I can’t see how you would get elected to be a leader of a Christian group without most people thinking you are Christian this is assuming the positions are through election. So there is no need for signing such a statement. Are these Christain groups that beauracratic?

Okay, that’s twice today! 🙂 It was a long night of pool shooting.
Kelly, you’re focusing on something which isn’t consequential. Whether they sign a piece of paper or take an oath, or simply state what they are is what is consequential. It isn’t the signing a piece of paper, it is the discriminatory practice that requires their leaders be Christian is what the university is objecting to.

Suyts
It is totally consequential it is the only thing the University is complaining about they have not said anything else going by the article, just remove that section from the constitution that is all and yes can’t change to be the same like an oath or whatever. A little bit of pragmatism and yes applies to the university also.

Kelly, you’re missing the point. Why should the club, or any club, be forced to alter their constitution to meet the satisfaction of the university to the point of altering who can and who can’t lead the group of people?

Suyts You are creating a point that does not exist in reality. The only thing that is real is that that part of the constitution should be removed or must be retained. Personally I can’t see what the fuss is about. If I am the University I would back down and if I was in the Christian group I would back down. Common sense tells you that a Christian or any other faith based group will choose one of there own to be a leader and the university won’t stop this they will only stop it being written down.

Kelly, it’s about the right of affirmation. The group is affirming that they are a Christian group and that only Christians can lead this group. The university is requiring them to recant such an affirmation before they can be allowed on the campus and be afforded the rights and privileges of the rest of the groups. And, while you may think this is a silly thing, it ignores many other events which have taken place in this country, such as girls demanding the right to be a boyscout and such.

To me it is all a bit silly. On the Universities part why didn’t they make it that if any complaints are made then they will consider it. If no complaints then don’t worry about it. I doubt that anyone would actually complain about this. It is interesting that calling it an Asian club was not a problem. For me this could be more problematic for example in a school dominated by Asian students and only a few Blacks Whites etc. , it would definately make them feel unwelcome. Would it be as acceptable to have a White Christian group, I suspect not.